Search results

I've found this perceived problem, of ranged exceptionalism at some tables, can be exacerbated by lax observance of encumbrance rules and ease of ammunition access. DM: "You've been shooting three crossbow bolts every round of every fight this entire dungeon. Aren't you just about out by now?"...

I wouldn't even have a problem with a DM's initial reaction to be, "I'm not sure. While your warlock is delving into the possibility IC, I will consider it on my end and get back to you."

I think the real issue is that different people have wildly different definitions of "balance". And, more importantly, what constitutes an acceptable window of variance, or range, within that perceived balance.

This whole "rolling initiative, but having zero stimuli to indicate combat has started" thing, sorta smacks to me of the same kind of playstyle where the DM "rolls dice behind a screen for no reason just to keep the players on their toes". Like the DM enjoys toying with the players as much as...

As I said earlier, I don't see why a fiendish patron couldn't also be in favor of certain warlocks becoming liches. Even if the original pact involved forfeiture of their soul upon demise. Maybe the fiend has long-term interests in the material world that the lich, now with plenty of time, can...

Yeah. Depending on the relationship, some patrons might consider it cheating. Others happy to see their ward will continue to exude influence in the world for a long time to come. I'm sure others still would either not care at all, or ever know, or have even a hint.

This. For clarification on my earlier anecdotal story, the player of the cleric, and the DM, had full advance buy-in on my pulling the lich trick.

Somehow the solution I proposed for heavy armor doesn't also work for medium? You do not lose effectiveness as a fighter by choosing high Dex with light armor. Many people have convincingly argued the opposite is true. It is actually a superior choice, over Str-based with heavy armor, in many...

Back in an old, long-running 2e AD&D campaign, my LE necromancer warlock (wizard with the witch kit) painstakingly concocted one of these fabled potions of lichdom in secret. It took a while, both in character and game time. But eventually it would be worth it. It wasn't for him, though. The NG...

One of my favorite go-tos for evil campaigns even has a recent super-villain campaign created in the same vein, by Savage Worlds, called "Necessary Evil". The PCs are bad guys. But they must come together to defeat a threat even more terrible than they are. In D&D, I've used stuff like...

If you never put on any heavy armor, does it matter if a piece of paper told you technically you could have? Its kinda like a case of Schrodinger's Armor. If your character never wore it, nor ever even mentioned he could, did he really have that training? Heck, just don't write that proficiency...

Okay, cool. Me too. I loved 4e and played the heck out of it for years. Sometimes high level, as well. Hasn't anything to do with my previous response, though.

Something like that definitely changes the intended difficulty paradigm a lot more noticeably than my proposition. Do you consider spellcasters "overpowered" and in need of a serious nerfing?

If you say so. I wasn't planning on adding, or removing, anything from the list of things negatively impacted by being in melee while attempting. The rules as-is clearly cover what triggers it already. I'm just contemplating adding an option available to the opponent(s) when it comes up. That's...

I had only considered spells currently affected by disadvantage to ranged attack rolls for being in melee. It would be forced, and unduly punishing IMO, to impose such a thing on a caster trying to use shocking grasp, for example.

Yup. Exactly the point I was getting at.

What a terrible analogy. First, those old Camrys are still going to be ranked best to worst. And most buyers are going to want the best remaining car. Second, you are claiming that the feats being banned are somehow so far exceptional/superior (or broken) that they exceed the value of the...

By definition, when you remove what you perceive to be the top five most potent items from a larger list of items, there will be a new top five most potent items on the remaining list of items. I wonder which five are next for the ban list? And when you eventually get down to the last five...

See above. You are attacking a strawman at this point. I've only ever addressed a specific, narrow scenario. Not sure what everyone is trying to prove by taking it out into the wider world of generic, all-encompassing possibilities. Are people white-knighting at this point? Or maybe trying to...

Nope. Nothing that would make any sense, anyway. Unless you, as the cleric, are intentionally playing daft or trying to handicap yourself. I guess, sure, if you go out of your way to make terrible decisions, you may find yourself in a bad situation. There's always that. You mentioning an older...